What is interesting about these two is that they must have been blown into a multipart opening final shape mould to get the accuracy necessary for the Walsh-supplied metal fittings to be a tight fit. My example of A3226 is like yours, missing its fitting. What is noteworthy about mine is the poor state of the mould lines, by far the worst condition multipart opening mould I've ever seen used on a Walsh piece.

I suspect that mine was made in a worn secondhand mould, probably acquired by Walsh from the Continent, but until I find a match by the earlier glassworks I can't be certain.

What mould lines, if any, are on yours, and what condition are they in?

Bernard C.

Logged

Happy New Year to All Glass Makers, Historians, Dealers, and Collectors

Don't think it's Bohemian,isn't it 'Brocade' pattern,where have I put that book?

Keith — Yes, it's Brocade, but only part of the pattern. This causes some confusion at times. Indeed the best example I've seen was a green vase on a leaf foot which was on Mervyn Gulliver's stand at the National some five years ago. It was quite small, only about 6" high including the short stem and foot. He hadn't attributed it as he hadn't recognised the pattern. He saw it as soon as I pointed out that it was the upper part of the Brocade pattern.

I conclude that Walsh's Brocade was quite a large dip mould, impractical for small objects. Northwood's slightly later copy of the mould was considerably smaller. For example, see Heacock 2, revised 2nd edition, 1977, p.55 for a Northwood salt and pepper in Brocade with a fairly complete pattern that I believe would have been impossible using the Walsh mould. You will also see small examples of Northwood's Brocade mould in Heacock & Gamble 9, 1987, and possibly in other volumes in the series.

Bernard C.

Logged

Happy New Year to All Glass Makers, Historians, Dealers, and Collectors

This is in response to Bernard's comment about the BROCADE pattern being large. Here is a group montage photo of 4 pieces I have had (I have since traded off two of the 4, but still have the BROCADE piece). The little cross (or 'X') that is in the pattern just barely ended up on the rim of the piece (shown top right).

Dave — grateful thanks. That's an excellent example, the best I've seen, showing that Walsh was restricted to about one third or less of their Brocade pattern (measured vertically) for this lovely small tazza. I think my theory is well on the way to being proven.

Do you have any photographs of small Northwood Brocade pieces for comparison? Heacock volumes 2 and 9 are not readily accessible to the majority of GMB members!

Warmest regards,

Bernard C.

Logged

Happy New Year to All Glass Makers, Historians, Dealers, and Collectors

Bernard: I do not collect any of the Northwood pieces, (originally called Opaline Brocade, then erroneously called SPANISH LACE), due to it being manufactured in large numbers and because it was a direct rip-off of a JWW pattern! JWW advertised the pattern a full 13 months before Northwood introduced his pattern. JWW is also a more delicate glass than Northwood, and has a lot more variety in the pattern. My prize piece in JWW's pattern is a oil lamp shade, something Northwood never made. The spot pattern is really stretched, but is the real deal. I don't have any photos of Northwood's version that I actually took and have rights to share with the group, but I can share my lampshade photos!

I took this photo of a friend's piece, and have rights to use the photo of this other JWW OPALINE BROCADE piece. It is vaseline opalescent, with cranberry on the inside (we call it RUBINA VERDE OPALESCENT in the USA):

And finally, this is a piece that I used to own (and I took this picture and have rights to use it). This piece was about 7" in diameter at the widest point. I sold it to the owner of the piece shown immediately above (and he wants my little twisty tazza too!)